[Tagging] Vote / Opinion poll about history=event

John Smith deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com
Thu May 5 16:10:06 BST 2011

On 6 May 2011 00:59, Pieren <pieren3 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 4:30 PM, John Smith <deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> In fact the only thing that will be accomplished by removing
>> references on the wiki is people will use multiple key/value pairs for
>> the same type of object because they can't see any other values that are
>> already documented.
> Between the two extremes, completely removing or putting the controversed
> tag 'event' prominent in the Map Features (where the feedback shows that the
> tag is far away from a consensus), I tried something new with this

So far one person has gamed the vote, hardly convincing, especially
since they wish to do away with historic=battlefield as well, of which
there is 317 tagged objects, and based on a quick glance a large
variety of people using that tag in the 3-4 years of it being

> considered as a "map feature". This is a lot of efforts to find a compromise
> to satisfy everyone.

Already some think what can be mapped should be limited and enforced
on the wiki, but it won't limit anything, it will just make a mess of
things in terms of the same type of object being tagged in many
different ways.

> You will find anyway in the database much much more undocumented tags than
> documented tags. So keep the Map Features page for what it has been created.

So that is a reason to remove documented features that would be useful
for others wanting to tag the same thing?

Already someone else has used it as well.

More information about the Tagging mailing list